Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Execution Layer Meeting 168 #845

Closed
timbeiko opened this issue Aug 9, 2023 · 8 comments
Closed

Execution Layer Meeting 168 #845

timbeiko opened this issue Aug 9, 2023 · 8 comments

Comments

@timbeiko
Copy link
Collaborator

timbeiko commented Aug 9, 2023

Meeting Info

Agenda

  • Dencun Updates
  • Holesky updates
  • EIP/ERC repo split
  • Naming fork specs
  • EIP discussons
@yperbasis
Copy link
Member

(Minor) Perhaps we should prefix all upgrades in mainnet-upgrades with the upgrade number, like 01-homestead, 02-dao-fork and so on? Or add a meta doc describing the order of upgrades. Right now you have to know the sequence of historical upgrades by heart.

@ulerdogan
Copy link

Hello! I would love to present EIP-7212, which proposes a new precompiled contract for the secp256r1 curve. We want to receive feedback or reviews from the community and raise awareness while the EIP is being improved, as it's a Core Track EIP on the EL.

@SamWilsn
Copy link

I'd like to add an update from the EIP Editors on splitting the repository and governance changes.

@timbeiko
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@yperbasis we do have some form of Meta doc here. Let me know if you think that's sufficient or if we should still modify it.

@SamWilsn @ulerdogan added your items to the agenda 👍

@holgerd77
Copy link

@yperbasis we do have some form of Meta doc here. Let me know if you think that's sufficient or if we should still modify it.#843

I think this is just meant for the file names in the mentioned folder, and I would say that for this it would still be pretty useful to have easier access to the files there (at the end something minor though, still nice).

@parithosh
Copy link
Member

We'd like to bring up testing updates from Devnet-8 and Holesky updates (We tested out 1.4M validators and >1B ether in the network and would like to propose the same for Holesky).

@timbeiko
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Got it @holgerd77 - added to the agenda. @parithosh same :-)

@timbeiko
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Closed in favor of #850

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants